I am in favor of the editorial page presenting both sides of an argument, but if the point of the argument is whether or not one plus one is two, then there is only one side. The top half of Friday's commentary page was the case for impeachment ("Trump's inquiry defiance is hard to defend," Oct. 11). The bottom half was Hugh Hewitt attempting to defend the indefensible with numerous ridiculous arguments ("House kangaroo court is breaking with precedent," Oct. 11). While reading it, I felt embarrassed for him. The Star Tribune needs to stop presenting the other side when there is no other side.
At the risk of repeating a few well-explored points, first, the phrase "kangaroo court" is out of line because an impeachment proceeding is not a court at all. It is more akin to a grand jury deciding whether or not to hand down an indictment. If they do, then President Donald Trump will have his day in court in the Senate. Second, Hewitt quotes the White House's letter complaining that the "House has not provided the Committees' Ranking Members with the authority to issue subpoenas." Tell me how the Intelligence Committee was run when the Republicans were in control. He cites "lack of any basis for … inquiry." The White House transcript of the phone call is in itself sufficient basis for an inquiry.
And finally, ignoring all the other holes in Hewitt's position, I submit that a proper sporting analogy is not corrupt officials but unruly, obnoxious fans shouting, "Kill the umpire!"
David M. Perlman, New Hope
• • •
On Sept. 10, 2018, Trump issued an executive order concerning foreign interference in U.S. elections. In the order, he found that "the ability of persons located, in whole or in substantial part, outside the United States to interfere in or undermine public confidence in United States elections ... constitutes an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States." Consequently, the order set forth mechanisms for imposing severe sanctions on any persons so interfering.
In a July 25 phone call Trump solicited from the Ukrainian president information that would hurt his potential opponent in the 2020 election, Joe Biden ("I would like you to do us a favor, though").
This is what Speaker Nancy Pelosi means when she says that Trump is "self-impeaching."
How can anyone claim that Trump has not committed an impeachable offense when he requested a foreign leader engage in the very behavior he has found to be "an unusual and extraordinary threat" to our country's national security?
William R. Goetz, Minneapolis
TRUMP'S RALLY
Hate coming from whom, exactly?
I had to do a double take at a reader's letter that found fault in the behavior of some protesters at Trump's Minneapolis rally. Among the perceived offenses? "An endless stream of hate and rage," "harassment and intimidation" and name-calling. Dude, are you joking? These behaviors are the foundation of Donald Trump's entire career and presidency!